Progressive Disenchantment Atonement

Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Clete said:
There isn't anyone who knows anything about me or my doctrine who could rightly accuse me of preaching a works-righteousness.

Also, I've never known anyone who articulated your point here who could explain to me the difference inherent in the distinction you are making. The fact is that "Faith is trust, fidelity, and dependence on Christ." is itself a doctrine. A doctrine that I think is basically correct. The question is, trust in what? Responding with, "Trust in Christ." only shifts the goal post. In other words, instead of defining trust, now you have have to define the term "Christ". I'd love to see you do that without diving head first into more doctrine. See the problem?
Click to expand...
It's funny how people so often hang themselves by what they say. :rolleyes:

It reminds me of "there are no absolutes"... that being an absolute statement.
Or "you shouldn't be dogmatic"... which is also a dogmatic statement.
Or "you shouldn't judge"... which is judgmental.

The list goes on and on.
 
JudgeRightly

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Clete

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Right Divider said:
It's funny how people so often hang themselves by what they say. :rolleyes:

It reminds me of "there are no absolutes"... that being an absolute statement.
Or "you shouldn't be dogmatic"... which is also a dogmatic statement.
Or "you shouldn't judge"... which is judgmental.

The list goes on and on.
Click to expand...
It's a common mistake and it's surprisingly easy to miss the fact that you're making it, or at least it is in today's society where people haven't ever really been taught to even look for such things.

It's annoying when people who aught to know better commit this sort of error but I don't think MWinther is in that category. I think he was just articulating that faith has to be real. And to that extent, he's right.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Clete said:
It's a common mistake and it's surprisingly easy to miss the fact that you're making it, or at least it is in today's society where people haven't ever really been taught to even look for such things.

It's annoying when people who aught to know better commit this sort of error but I don't think MWinther is in that category. I think he was just articulating that faith has to be real. And to that extent, he's right.
Click to expand...
While I agree, he has some serious issues like not being able to understand that one cannot have faith in God if one does not even believe that God exists. Some real fundamental problems there.

P.S. That was one of his problems with your excellent list. Even being the first element on your list.
 
MWinther

MWinther

Member
Clete said:
There isn't anyone who knows anything about me or my doctrine who could rightly accuse me of preaching a works-righteousness.

Also, I've never known anyone who articulated your point here who could explain to me the difference inherent in the distinction you are making. The fact is that "Faith is trust, fidelity, and dependence on Christ." is itself a doctrine. A doctrine that I think is basically correct. The question is, trust in what? Responding with, "Trust in Christ." only shifts the goal post. In other words, instead of defining trust, now you have have to define the term "Christ". I'd love to see you do that without diving head first into more doctrine. See the problem?
Click to expand...
The divine cannot be reduced to a set of doctrines. Barth is right to warn that Christians often try to construct a ladder of propositions to reach God, as though salvation were something we could secure by assembling the correct system. Doctrines are indispensable, but they are not God; they can never contain Him. Knowing the doctrines is not the same as knowing the living God.

When faith collapses into doctrinal correctness, the door to God effectively closes. Religion becomes a matter of mastering propositions rather than receiving the Spirit. In this sense, certain strands of Protestantism drift towards a rule‑based posture: faith becomes "getting the doctrines right," and divine encounter is replaced by intellectual compliance. But the Holy Spirit is not confined to doctrinal systems. He speaks, disrupts, and calls—always exceeding the formulas meant to secure Him.

It is no wonder that theologians tend to sideline the Holy Spirit; He keeps overturning their systems. He is the divine otherness that refuses to be domesticated. Islam has faced a similar outcome: with the Spirit absent, religion hardens into a doctrinal structure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top